Our Plan, Part XVII
Oil and gas producers have significant value that is not being captured by today’s organizations. This value is seeping out of the industry into the energy consumers pockets by way of low commodity prices. At the same time investors who have provided the financial resources for the capital in the industry are waiting for the day when they may see a return on that investment. This is all within the producer's control if they began using the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production model with its price maker strategy. With so much value to be gained by the oil and gas producers why is it always someone else that has to pay for the producers benefit. And as such I am unwilling to discount our budget for the makeup of any of the producers in the industry. Other producers who are set to gain, and gain consistently, should contribute more in order to compensate for the laggards and startups.
Last Thursday the World Energy Council published their 2017 report. Stating the following regarding North America.
While natural gas and oil continue to trade near historic lows (albeit creeping higher in the last year), energy infrastructure investments require long-term confidence in pricing. There remains a degree of doubt that the stability in commodity pricing will continue for the duration of those investments. The abundance of natural gas in the United States and Canada, however, has assuaged fears about energy security and commodity price risk based on foreign policy.
Talent acquisition and retention will continue to be a focus for our industry in 2017. Like many industries that are transforming, the demand for top talent is critical as new opportunities and technologies continue to reshape the energy industry. Combined with generational turnover, energy leaders will continue to monitor this risk and be concerned about how to build the right teams required to achieve the transformational goals they have set for their organisations and the industry as a whole.
Market design continues to be one of the critical uncertainties in the FELs [Future Energy Leaders] agendas with a lesser impact than the prior year but with a higher impact than the global monitor. In the FEL’s vision, to embrace new frontiers, FELs urge the need to adopt new business models by means of modern technology and innovation, implementation of the right policies and greater collaboration and engagement with customers.
“Welcome to the party pal,” John McClain.
I find it interesting that these people have tied the low commodity prices with concern for the ability of the industry to provide a financial return to its investors. All throughout the time I’ve been doing this I’ve constantly been told by industry “leaders” that profits don’t matter, its cash flow. And I’ve argued that the accounting treatment of storing past production costs as property, plant and equipment on the balance sheet is a scam. In the World Energy Council’s report itself they state that half the costs of the energy infrastructure is attributable to oil and gas. Think about that for a minute and also understand that that infrastructure is aging rapidly and needs to be replaced or refurbished in the next 25 years. Where, or which investors will be scammed for that money?
The seriousness of this issue is captured by the World Energy Council. They state that commodity prices are the critical issue that the industry faces. The Preliminary Specification and our user community enable the price maker strategy that will allow the producers to return to profitable operations. To real profitable operations. Storing costs on the balance sheet is a fool's game played by fool’s. It doesn’t make you a better producer to have outsized balances of property, plant and equipment. It may, in this new environment that we are heading into, show that you don’t know what you're doing. Chevron is the worst culprit here. They have more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in property, plant and equipment, or 13 years worth of depletion. Why? How does this make them a better company? This only represents the amount that they’ve subsidized consumers for their energy costs. By not charging enough. If they treated those capital costs appropriately they would have written these costs off by this point. And in Chevron’s case, with only $145 billion in shareholders equity, that would have created massive losses for the past four decades. And hence why the producers use the accounting treatment that they do. The situation now is how do they reduce those balances of property, plant and equipment? And as an investor how should I assess a company's performance when they never made any money?
The scope of the problem is far worse than what the World Energy Council intimates in their report. We have a long and difficult road to travel in oil and gas. It’s not going to be good times. Only an extension of the bad times that we’ve experienced over the past few years. That is until we can fix this problem on an industry wide basis by implementing the Preliminary Specification, these difficulties will be the constant state of affairs. We can listen to the bureaucrats who assure us that it’s all under control, or realize in the mid to long run, changes need to be made.
The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don’t forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here.